pailryder:  kind of like when the examinee is wasting HIS time when there is a "properly identified CM".

Bill_Brown

I have been a member of this website every since its inception and have seen this insulting nature and, admittledy, been a part of it from the beginning. I love a good, intellgent debate. However, it seems that when one falls short, it evolves into insults and name calling. Pailryder has not been much of an insulting polygrapher. He mostly debates and asks intelligent questions. Invarialby, though, we all lose it at times. On the other hand, most polygraphers lose it just by reading the information here and immediately start attacking. It still amazes me that they let this website destroy their personality (if they ever had any) unless, of course, it is still presenting problems for them. Which, I suspect, is the case.

I usually don't debate the "technical aspects" of the polygraph because I don't know enough about it. I usually get involved when the insults and name calling starts. 

My involvement with the polygraph started in the 1960's when I had to take one for employment. I had a friend, at that time, in medical school and he showed me how to raise my BP. He also said that the anxiety produced by the test would prevent passing. Anyway I passed even with lieing. One of the question I lied on was "do you intend on making this a long term employment"? It was a piddling job and I had no intention of staying there. Ever since that test, I have researched the poly and come up with NA for employment.

Bill_Brown wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 10:48pm:


Bill_Brown

I agree completely, and I did not intend, nor do I see any insult in my postings.  stefano chose "the Lex Luthor of Polygraph" for himself and I don't think my use of his choice is an insult.  Maybe a small dig, because it seems a bit grandiose, but not an insult.

If this site was dedicated to the reform of polygraph, rather than abolishion, we would have much more common ground for civil discussion.

I believe, as the late Dr. David Lykken once wrote, " No good social purpose can be served by inventing ways of beating the lie detector or deceiving polygraphers."

Bill_Brown

You see what I mean here? 

polyboy1 and pailryder both has said that they have seen George's charts and that they are being used as training tools for polygraphers. I doubt if they will answer George. However, if they do and confirm the use then that is a strong indictment of the FBI as liars. Also a strong indictment of the agency as "Blacklisters". Isn't that a criminal offense? 

Statements have been made here folks. Let's have some confirmation or retraction.

Bill_Brown wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 10:48pm:


Bill

Is this opinion based on personal knowledge or private conversations?  I have read all of stefano's postings and I failed to find any that mentioned polygraph's strengths.

stefano

I understand and share your concern for compelled testing.  Even though you may personally think it foolish, is there room in your America for people to contract for a private polygraph?   

stefano

My assumption, which I am sure you will correct if I am wrong, is that you have a great deal of experience interviewing patients and making theraputic assessments.  If so, in your practice have you found any difference between the interview of a person seeking treatment by his own decision and one compelled to treatment by a court, probation officer or other authority?